The Original Sin: who is to blame?

[sooda]

Good so far.



Good...



I would not have you "believe" anything - I highly advise against it, because:

"BELIEF" IS NOT A VIRTUE



Glad we are agreed.



No, it is not. The only basis is the necessity for subtracting 666(x3) from Genesis' 2701 to derive 703, which is the framework of the original Adam and Eve prior to the fall. That the 3x666 represents satan in the psychological, emotional, instinctual centers of the being is my argument, which does not require a picture - I just provided one as a visual aid which some people assumed was an equilateral triangle, which it is not.



Yes it can - it is just that the 666 triangles will not be equilateral - as I never stated they were.



It's not the "area", it is the numerical significance. The picture is just a picture.



You can forget the picture and understand the concept independent of it. If you want to obsess over the picture, you can do that too. It's not mine anyways.



No - I am more enjoying understanding how/why people are making such a big deal over a picture, so I will leave it up.



Jesus is an idol - but 703 indicates a lot:

סוד דוך דחמרי לסוד אפלל מלל = The secret of my way is to the secret
עזרת יהוה = help of YHVH
שבויה ביד השטן = Captive of the Devil
חוסר הדדיות = Lack of mutuality/reciprocity
בתמורה לכ- = In return
ירושלים כסא יהוה = Jerusalem [the throne of] YHVH

Now what happens when you place a ש in the midst of יהוה ?

יהשוה

What is shin?
Psychology (666)
Emotions (666)
Instincts (666)

Or in other words, when YHVH "absorbs" ones own 666x3, they become יהשוה

What is 703?

עזרת יהוה = help of YHVH

For those who have ears.



It's plagiarism to take the story of someone else's tradition, without giving them credit.

That's what Judaism did.

How striking a 'semblance Gilgamesh has with Noah.

And here I am concerned about women being raped on a daily basis, and you are concerned about me posting a picture of a triangle.

See where the priority of the Jew lies - attack, attack, attack, become obsessed, attack, attack, attack, accuse, belittle, deny etc.

I read Adolph Hitler's Mein Kampf - just to understand how he saw the world and where/why he went insane. He explained that the Jews were very simply a blood-sucking creature that push marxist rot into societies. This predisposition would be later exploited by Palestinian leaders who used him to commit genocide against Jews, which is where he went insane.

There is a better solution, but it involves the Jew *admitting* the Torah is not from god, and the entire Abrahamic exodus is a fiction. This would necessarily require Islam visit its book, test its veracity (which it will be discovered that it, too, is man-made) and the entire M/E tribal conflict can cease. Humanity renounces idol-based religious institutions and we live in peace and harmony.

Of course, the Jew with their self-preservation obsession and "belief"-based identity is the obstacle.

It really is pathetic - but c'est la vie.

I read Adolph Hitler's Mein Kampf - just to understand how he saw the world and where/why he went insane. He explained that the Jews were very simply a blood-sucking creature that push marxist rot into societies.

This predisposition would be later exploited by Palestinian leaders who used him to commit genocide against Jews, which is where he went insane.


WHAT?????

 

[sooda]

Incorrect.



That is what makes you incorrect - "belief" is not a virtue.

It is moreso a vice: it is like saying, if we were to pool all of the "believers" of the world into a giant pool, 49% are 'true', 51% are 'untrue', eventually it will still collapse if given enough time. The real distribution is closer to, well...almost identical to wealth distribution. Most of the wealth of the planet is in the top 5%, probably rendering moreso a 5/95 split, which would invariably manifest perpetual war, which...

...we find! Over thousands of years - constant war over... what?

"Belief" in books and central figure idols?

Is a "belief"-based state which employs a central scripture/figure a viable model for humanity?
Judaism? Christianity? Islam?

Has either "belief"-based state ever produced a single-state (ie. no major divisions) that do not later split into numerous appendages that connect to the central state?

How can Islam be a religion of "peace" when it divided immediately upon the death of the prophet of Islam?

What are the implications that Muslims "BELIEVE" the Qur'an to have been delivered by god, but it is actually a man-made text?

See.. I don't think you understand what 'gravity' is, no offense. Please try to understand and factor in the gravity of claims - it is serious gravity. If false... big problems, and explains all of human history.



Who determines that? You, or me? Who is/was polarized by the comment?



There is no shame in being a Jew. I find that Jews are needed to solve the global M/E crisis, but it will take a great gesture of humility.



Because you are focusing on the figure/idol and not on the teaching itself.



Because it is necessary to understand satan - in fact related to the Ark of Noah.



Not for it to be 'known as' true, but to see the evidence which would lead to it.



No, you're abusing the word "belief" here.



Again - abusing the word. I told you we need a single reference definition.



Because you don't understand the point. The point is not about Jesus. It is about: is what he taught true, yes or no? I tested it. You did/have not. That is a problem that no sweeping dismissal of yours can deal with. If the crux of the argument (ie. understanding the kingdom of heaven) is chastity is a requirement, but someone tries to argue that this is subjective without testing it, they are the ones being subjective.

I hope you do not make that mistake.



It is yours.



See you're trying to imply/impose your own paranoia-driven perspective and read into what you want to be there. You are absolutely obsessed with trying to undermine me and virtue signal to others, meanwhile I am the one telling them "belief" is not a virtue anyways. It is very peculiar. But let me try to give you a child's way of seeing it.

Concerning a cat and a mouse;
For the mouse, it's life and death,
For the cat, it's just a game.

Whose game is this?

It is very easy to get you wound up. Personally: I keep things in perspective.

Hundreds of millions of people are dead.
Billions have a "belief"-based delusion.
Women are being raped by sexually degenerated men on a daily basis.
I set out 4 years ago to answer the question "from whence human suffering?"
I had to understand my own suffering first and release my own binds.
I found compassion in seeing others binds and how they are enslaved to them.

I see binds in others, and how they suffer them. But the ego/arrogance part is the mouse I'm going to keep batting at until we drop the ad hominem personal targeting. You're very, very narrow-minded when you make things of a personal nature not actually considering the suffering of others re: these matters of "belief"-based institutions and how (if what I say is true: that "belief" is not a virtue) "BELIEF" is directly responsible for a vast amount(s) of human suffering on this planet - ever moreso than the possible and/or temporary solace and occasional happenstance concordance with creation (if even by chance).

If the Torah/Bible/Qur'an show signs which overwhelmingly indicate that they are man-made and/or manhandled, there are billions of people who erroneously imbue these books with an authority they do not actually possess. If true (and this is true, given that the Torah alone shows such signs) the global "power" derived from such "beliefs" utilized by the various divisions of the state have the ability to use this power for purposes that necessarily indicate human suffering, war and death.

If someone "believes" something that is not true,
and their life energies are absorbed by a 'state' perpetuating the false "belief",
and this power can be used for illicit purposes,
and neither the Torah/Bible/Qur'an indicate any need whatsoever to "believe" they are of divine origin,

"BELIEF" IS NOT A VIRTUE

because:

i. There was no potent delivery, therefor no potency behind the god of Abraham (catastrophic) and no Hebrew Moses (justifying the state of Israel, which is technically an illegitimate state).
ii. There is no coming external "messiah" ie. Jesus was/is a Greek idol (idol worship)
iii. Muhammad's attempt to convince the Jews he was it, which failed, lead to the antisemitic disposition held by the "belief"-based 'state' of Islam
iv. Islam, itself a "belief"-based state, employs a forged book and male central figure whose sexual behavior resembles nothing short of an infidel man (and him having violated every single one of the ten commandments - ad absurdum) and purports this figure/idol as the most exemplary model of humanity.

One need not be a f*cking "prophet" to see it: Islam is a humanitarian crisis, based on an unresolved projected Messiah-complex developed by the early Jews who only suffered themselves and imagined a savior coming to save them.

Where are the priorities of the Jew re: humanity? Just stick together in their tribal mentality, or actually own up to their falsification of history?

That is where I end, and the rest of humanity takes on. I can't choose for humanity. I Islam is not addressed, it will rip everything apart as it always has, is, and will.

Muhammad is nowhere near 703: he is the imbalance of it. One could easily state he is the anti-Christ: his "example" certainly is.

Muhammed wasn't divine.. His early sermons preached Save yourselves. I cannot save you. Return to the God of Abraham.

 

[9-18-1]

Muhammed wasn't divine.. His early sermons preached Save yourselves. I cannot save you. Return to the God of Abraham.

If there was no potent delivery, there is no potent god of Abraham.
Further, if the Torah is manhandled, the Qur'an incorrectly refers to it as having been delivered to humanity from on High, which falsifies the Qur'an. This is consistent with the findings of Luling/Luxenberg: that the Qur'an is forged from Christian strophic hymns which explains how the "mercy upon mankind" Jesus was replaced with Muhammad circa. 685 CE. In other words, he was "switched" out. Islam has a remnant of this in it: advising Muslims that Jesus did not die on the cross, but was "switched" out. Consistent with Muhammad trying to convince the Jews *he* was their awaited Messiah. Consistent with Muhammad's growing resentment for Jews and subsequent genocide of them as a race. Consistent with Adolph Hitler's own conduct.

This renders Islam inherently idolatrous given, if even the Abrahamic god were real, a false testimony (breaking of a commandment) is required upon joining Islam which requires the testimony of a dead man. You can not testify of a dead man unless making a testimony of "faith" (ie. "BELIEF").

"BELIEF" IS NOT A VIRTUE

Hundreds of millions are dead.

I think Muhammad couldn't deal with the superior status of Jesus - he wanted to be the last, greatest prophet of the god of Abraham. He couldn't stand rejection: became a political force and "forced" his religion onto the world: that he, and he alone, is the final messenger.

I have found the root of Muhammadan insanity.

 

[ecco]

You just continue to try to avoid answering the simple question...Where in your holy scripture does it state that "Lucifer was created million(sic) of years before Adam and Eve were created"?

Yes, you made that assertion. It is for you to address it. It is for you to justify it.

As I said before Lucifer was a cherub.
And then God changed his name to Satan.

Of course would probably wouldn't be able to understand this, if you don't have any understanding about the first earth age.

In the book of Ezekiel 28:15, here we find Lucifer and then in the book of Job 1:6 here we find Satan being mentioning of.
Both Lucifer and Satan are one and the same person.
But as I said, unless you have understanding about the first earth age and how Lucifer lead one third of the angels in heaven in Rebellion against God.

And how God changed Lucifer's name to Satan.

The discussion isn't about changing names, it is about your assertion that "Lucifer was created million(sic) of years before Adam and Eve were created".

You cannot cop out by saying I have no understanding of the first earth age. You talk about it but cannot show any basis for it in the Bible (or anywhere else). And that is what the discussion has been about: You showing justification in scripture for your assertions.

You mention the books of Ezekiel and Job. Nothing in those verses says anything about Lucifer/Satan predating Adam & Eve by a million years.

If you had taken the time to read and understand the verses you quoted, you would have seen that they say nothing about a million years or about a "First Earth Age".

Ezekiel 28
14Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.

15Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.

16By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.

Job 1
6Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them. 7And the LORD said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it. 8And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?
​

Are you so naive that you believed I wouldn't take the time to read the verses for myself? Are you so naive that you believed I would just take your word for it?

 

[URAVIP2ME]

You have Christians who are teaching Serpent Seed as doctrine.. which does involve sex.
The serpent seed doctrine is also closely related to other erroneous beliefs such as the Christian Identity Movement and the Kenite doctrine.
Like many false beliefs, it has a built-in defense mechanism; that is, anyone who disagrees with it is accused of being a son of the serpent.

That would Not be Christians because Christians go by what is recorded in Scripture.
There is absolutely No ' Serpent Seed ' involving sex at Genesis 3:15.
The first prophecy is what is found at Genesis 3:15 about God's wife-like organization that is the symbolic ' woman '.
This 'symbolic woman' is the woman as described in Revelation 12th chapter.
She gives birth to a ' spiritual nation ' a ' spiritual organization ' - 1 Peter 2:9,5
Jesus as Messiah is the 'seed' who will bruise Satan as the Serpent in the head ( a death blow ).
That is why Hebrews 2:14 B says Jesus will destroy Satan.
While God's organization, through God's kingdom, will govern over Earth - Daniel 2:44.

 

[ecco]

I read Adolph Hitler's Mein Kampf - just to understand how he saw the world and where/why he went insane. He explained that the Jews were very simply a blood-sucking creature that push marxist rot into societies.

This predisposition would be later exploited by Palestinian leaders who used him to commit genocide against Jews, which is where he went insane.


WHAT?????

Yeah. What????

 

[dybmh]

Because it is necessary to understand satan - in fact related to the Ark of Noah.

Is this documented in the thread you created on this subject?

Wasn't that thread where you were sharing beliefs?

Because you don't understand the point. The point is not about Jesus. It is about: is what he taught true, yes or no? I tested it. You did/have not. That is a problem that no sweeping dismissal of yours can deal with.

That's an assumption. You **believe** I am discounting it.

Most respectfully: If you have tested it; but you cannot demonstrate it; that is a belief.

I am not faulting your conclusions individually. Some are good, some are bad. But you're central claim: BELIEF IS NOT A VIRTUE is false. Because over and over again, you are using belief to prove your point.

No, you're abusing the word "belief" here.

This is valuable; I think you should elaborate on this.

Again - abusing the word. I told you we need a single reference definition.

The single reference definition you provided previously was still based on belief. If you can find an objective 3rd party definition that matches your understanding; I support it; I think that is valuable as well.

That is a problem that no sweeping dismissal of yours can deal with. If the crux of the argument (ie. understanding the kingdom of heaven) is chastity is a requirement, but someone tries to argue that this is subjective without testing it, they are the ones being subjective.

Chastity is in fact irrelevant. If you want to show a correlation between chastity, whether or not belief is a virtue, you will need a sample size larger than 1. Right now, your evidence is, I did it and so can you. But I have no one else to back me up. It is very weak evidence. You are presenting a case study where the sample size is 1. Unless, you want us to **believe** you.

 

[9-18-1]

I read Adolph Hitler's Mein Kampf - just to understand how he saw the world and where/why he went insane. He explained that the Jews were very simply a blood-sucking creature that push marxist rot into societies.

This predisposition would be later exploited by Palestinian leaders who used him to commit genocide against Jews, which is where he went insane.


WHAT?????

Yeah. What????

What what?

You don't actually "believe" a man as intelligent as Adolph Hitler (though he had small-identity syndrome, identifying with/as supremely Germanic) would find a real solution instead of a 'Final Solution' without adopting the agenda of Islam? Especially considering he naturally developed an antisemitic sentiment earlier in his youth - a string to be played upon evident from then.

No connection to Islam?
Do you know what negotiating strategies Hitler used to successively conquer?
Any connection to Islam and Muhammad's negotiating strategies?
What various treaties did Muhammad draft, only to later break and blame on Jews?
Who did Hitler blame for losing his war?

See, knowing requires both fact and narrative. Image and likeness. Can be understood as severity and mercy: the two reeds of the Ark of Noah - the center column the spine.

If the Qur'an is indeed forged (as it is) this single problem alone explains the majority of human suffering on the planet.

Define 'idol worship'.
Infallible? Protected from scrutiny?

Define 'supremacist'.
One who "believes" themselves superior to others.

"BELIEF" IS NOT A VIRTUE

 

[dybmh]

See you're trying to imply/impose your own paranoia-driven perspective and read into what you want to be there. You are absolutely obsessed with trying to undermine me and virtue signal to others,

This is a belief. It's not true.

I see binds in others, and how they suffer them

That's a belief; you do not know how they suffer. You are assuming that they are "bound" and that they suffer. Is there any objective proof for this. If not: it is belief. If that belief leads to empathy and that empathy leads you to do good deeds.

Belief is a virtue ( in that case ).

You're very, very narrow-minded when you make things of a personal nature not actually considering the suffering of others

I'm not doing any of that; I am actually quite open minded. Can you show objectively that I am not open minded?

The quote above is based on belief.

there are billions of people who erroneously imbue these books with an authority they do not actually possess.

Source? Do you have any data that supports this? How do you **know** the people you are talking about "imbue these books with authority"? How do you know it? It is something you believe. But you have no data to prove it.

Also "billions" please provide some data to support this number.

"BELIEF" IS NOT A VIRTUE

And yet, that is all you are using to support your claims. The few good ones and the many many false ones. It's all belief. No objective facts at all.

One need not be a f*cking "prophet" to see it: Islam is a humanitarian crisis, based on an unresolved projected Messiah-complex developed by the early Jews who only suffered themselves and imagined a savior coming to save them.

But this is a belief; Even if you are right, without data; it is just belief. Based on the politcal commentary you have mixed into this thread; Right-wing fundamentalist propaganda and stereotyping has lead to this conclusion about Islam and the Humanitarian crisis.

If you have data; go for it; It seems this is what you want to talk about since your other claims are all vapor, myth, and belief.

 

[9-18-1]

Is this documented in the thread you created on this subject?

Wasn't that thread where you were sharing beliefs?

That's an assumption. You **believe** I am discounting it.

Most respectfully: If you have tested it; but you cannot demonstrate it; that is a belief.

I am not faulting your conclusions individually. Some are good, some are bad. But you're central claim: BELIEF IS NOT A VIRTUE is false. Because over and over again, you are using belief to prove your point.


This is valuable; I think you should elaborate on this.

The single reference definition you provided previously was still based on belief. If you can find an objective 3rd party definition that matches your understanding; I support it; I think that is valuable as well.

Chastity is in fact irrelevant. If you want to show a correlation between chastity, whether or not belief is a virtue, you will need a sample size larger than 1. Right now, your evidence is, I did it and so can you. But I have no one else to back me up. It is very weak evidence. You are presenting a case study where the sample size is 1. Unless, you want us to **believe** you.

We're not on the same page with what constitutes a "belief".

I will not yield to a 3rd party definition of "belief" because I don't yield to authority. I will produce my own, and you can hold it against me in any way you can, including retrospective.

Which "conclusions" do you find good?

By the way: "belief is not a virtue" takes "belief" as <in and of itself>. That is to say, the statement "belief is sometimes a virtue" is equally false because it still involves <in and of itself>.

However, modifying it to "some beliefs are virtuous" is tenable, but not detrimental to "belief is not a virtue" because the argument treats "belief" as a single object without a particular form, whereas "beliefs" indicate objects with form.

When something becomes an object of belief, whatever that object is, is without virtue, because "belief" is not a virtue. Whence: truth is not an object, but "belief" is.

Therefor "belief" is not a virtue deals directly with the object of "belief" itself.

This is true because there are higher virtues than "belief", one of which is to know.

 

[sooda]

What what?

You don't actually "believe" a man as intelligent as Adolph Hitler (though he had small-identity syndrome, identifying with/as supremely Germanic) would find a real solution instead of a 'Final Solution' without adopting the agenda of Islam? Especially considering he naturally developed an antisemitic sentiment earlier in his youth - a string to be played upon evident from then.

No connection to Islam?
Do you know what negotiating strategies Hitler used to successively conquer?
Any connection to Islam and Muhammad's negotiating strategies?
What various treaties did Muhammad draft, only to later break and blame on Jews?
Who did Hitler blame for losing his war?

See, knowing requires both fact and narrative. Image and likeness. Can be understood as severity and mercy: the two reeds of the Ark of Noah - the center column the spine.

If the Qur'an is indeed forged (as it is) this single problem alone explains the majority of human suffering on the planet.

Define 'idol worship'.
Infallible? Protected from scrutiny?

Define 'supremacist'.
One who "believes" themselves superior to others.

"BELIEF" IS NOT A VIRTUE

Hitler considered Arabs to be inferior mud people.. after all, they too are Semites. He did suck up to them initially when he thought to execute Plan Orient and control all the oil from the Caspian to the Persian Gulf.

By 1939 EVERY Arab state had signed on with the Allies ..

You sure don't know anything about Muhammed or Islam.

 

[dybmh]

I will not yield to a 3rd party definition of "belief" because I don't yield to authority. I will produce my own, and you can hold it against me in any way you can, including retrospective.

Right: No objective definition. The words mean whatever you **believe** they mean.

 

[dybmh]

By the way: "belief is not a virtue" takes "belief" as <in and of itself>. That is to say, the statement "belief is sometimes a virtue" is equally false because it still involves <in and of itself>.

However, modifying it to "some beliefs are virtuous" is tenable, but not detrimental to "belief is not a virtue" because the argument treats "belief" as a single object without a particular form, whereas "beliefs" indicate objects with form.

When something becomes an object of belief, whatever that object is, is without virtue, because "belief" is not a virtue. Whence: truth is not an object, but "belief" is.

All of this: Circular Reasoning. It is a logical fallacy. Meaning: All of this in the above quote is illogical.

hyperlink >>> wikipedia - Circular reasoning

"Circular reasoning is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with"

 

[9-18-1]

This is a belief. It's not true.

I don't yield to your usage of "belief".

That's a belief; you do not know how they suffer.

I don't yield to your usage of "belief".
I do know how some suffer - knowing something does not mean being able to prove it to someone else. You seem to think this necessitates it a "belief" but this is all you take it as anyways.

If I 'know' something, but you do not likewise 'know' it, you will treat it as a "belief" anyways, especially if you "believe" to know it is not true.

You are assuming that they are "bound" and that they suffer. Is there any objective proof for this. If not: it is belief. If that belief leads to empathy and that empathy leads you to do good deeds.

Did you just ask me for proof that other people are suffering in the world?

lol

Belief is a virtue ( in that case ).

"Belief" is not a virtue - some "beliefs" are virtuous.

I'm not doing any of that; I am actually quite open minded. Can you show objectively that I am not open minded?

I can give a quote that explains the problem from my end:

“When I, a thoughtful and unblessed Presbyterian, examine the Koran, I know that beyond any question every Mohammedan is insane, not in all things, but in religious matters. I cannot prove to him that he is insane, because you never can prove anything to a lunatic — for that is a part of his insanity and the evidence of it.” – Mark Twain

The quote above is based on belief.

I don't yield to your usage of "belief".

Source? Do you have any data that supports this? How do you **know** the people you are talking about "imbue these books with authority"? How do you know it? It is something you believe. But you have no data to prove it.

You're in the deep end now - losing interest. I think you've completely disconnected from the reality. You're questioning whether or not people people "believe" the scriptures have something to do with a god.

I'm not playing this kind of pathetic game - not that taking offense is a virtue, but I'm shocked that you seem to have no regard for humanity in general asking for such.

Any physical object inherently has no objective authority. The authority is imbued by the one perceiving it.

Also "billions" please provide some data to support this number.

And yet, that is all you are using to support your claims. The few good ones and the many many false ones. It's all belief. No objective facts at all.

But this is a belief; Even if you are right, without data; it is just belief. Based on the politcal commentary you have mixed into this thread; Right-wing fundamentalist propaganda and stereotyping has lead to this conclusion about Islam and the Humanitarian crisis.

If you have data; go for it; It seems this is what you want to talk about since your other claims are all vapor, myth, and belief.

Right-wing fundamentalist propaganda? What about Left-wing fundamentalist propaganda? Extremism is on both sides.

Do you really think there are not two sides of every equation?

What tree are you eating from? Trying to polarize this?

You have some deep internal issues that I seriously don't want to get involved in. You're trying to associate me as being a right-wing fundamentalist?

My conclusions are based on facts: it is not true that the Qur'an is perfectly preserved and/or owing of any status of divine authorship. That it is man-made, juxtaposed with the "belief" that it is of divine origin naturally renders it a humanitarian crisis - the principle world division of "believer" vs. "unbeliever" is derived from it (inherited from Christianity).

I do not support divided worldviews: that you allow "belief" as a basis for being is a problem, not a solution, in the same way Islam is a problem, not a solution.

But you trying to label me a right-wing fundamentalist is unacceptable because I happen to reject the central claim of Islam - and those who do are persecuted for it by left-wing fundamentalism.

Sorry, but not going any further with this - you are not going to try to label me something I know I am not. The derivation is sound, clear, and my statement that Islam is a humanitarian crisis stands.

 

[dybmh]

@9-18-1, Sorry. But this is another example where you are showing your beliefs.

If there was no potent delivery, there is no potent god of Abraham.

You cannot prove that there was no potent delivery. You believe it. But it is not a fact. That is why you said "IF".

if the Torah is manhandled, the Qur'an incorrectly refers to it as having been delivered to humanity from on High, which falsifies the Qur'an.

This is another belief. You cannot prove that the Torah is manhandled.

This is consistent with the findings of Luling/Luxenberg: that the Qur'an is forged

Please provide a source for fact checking. At this point you have demonstrated low quality research. Unless... you are asking us to **believe** you.

which explains how the "mercy upon mankind" Jesus was replaced with Muhammad circa. 685 CE.

Source please; unless you are asking us to **believe** you, please provide a source for this claim that Jesus was replaced.

Consistent with Muhammad trying to convince the Jews *he* was their awaited Messiah. Consistent with Muhammad's growing resentment for Jews and subsequent genocide of them as a race. Consistent with Adolph Hitler's own conduct.

And the rest of these "Consistent with" statements: these are all conclusions based on belief. I think this is called "connecting the dots". Making little leaps of faith, following a bread crumb trail based on the **belief** that a person are on the right track.

You are connecting the dots. You may be right about all this; you may be wrong. But at this point, it's all just belief.

 

[dybmh]

“When I, a thoughtful and unblessed Presbyterian, examine the Koran, I know that beyond any question every Mohammedan is insane, not in all things, but in religious matters. I cannot prove to him that he is insane, because you never can prove anything to a lunatic — for that is a part of his insanity and the evidence of it.” – Mark Twain

Please bring quotes from the Qur'an and we can go there. I feel quite comfortable defending it.

 

[dybmh]

I don't yield to your usage of "belief".
I do know how some suffer - knowing something does not mean being able to prove it to someone else. You seem to think this necessitates it a "belief" but this is all you take it as anyways.

The burden of proof is on you. You made the claim: A negative assertion: Belief is not a virtue; yet I have shown over and over how it is and how you are using belief to advance your claim.

 

[dybmh]

What about Left-wing fundamentalist propaganda?

What have I said that is Left Wing Propaganda?

And you are not denying that your conclusions are based on right-wing fundamentalist propaganda.

Noted.

 

[dybmh]

Did you just ask me for proof that other people are suffering in the world?

I said **and**. The assumption you are making is the source of the suffering.

Right or wrong; your statement was another example of your **beliefs**.

 

[dybmh]

that it is of divine origin naturally renders it a humanitarian crisis - the principle world division of "believer" vs. "unbeliever"

That's a belief. You believe but you have no proof.

Please provide evidence that "it is of divine origin that naturally renders a humanitarian crisis".

Until you do; it is still just a belief.